ganns@hound.UUCP (R.GANNS) (09/18/85)
Has anyone been monitoring any of the Dreyfus funds? I have been tracking liquid assets and the intermediate tax exempt bond fund in terms of price per share and yield since July '84. Does anyone have similar info on any of the other funds that they'd like to trade? -- Rich ihnp4!hou2a!hound!ganns
dave@cylixd.UUCP (Dave Kirby) (09/20/85)
In article <1361@hound.UUCP> ganns@hound.UUCP (R.GANNS) writes: >Has anyone been monitoring any of the Dreyfus funds? ... >... Does anyone >have similar info on any of the other funds that they'd like to >trade? -- Rich ihnp4!hou2a!hound!ganns The May 20, 1985 issue of Barron's had a very extensive section on mutual funds and their performance ratings over a quarter, a year, 5 years, 10 years, and 15 years. An initial investment of $10,000 was assumed, and the appreciation in share value was measured over those time periods. The best of the top 25 for the year 3/31/84 - 3/31/85 were: Pacific Horizon Agg Gro +55% Prudential Bache Utilities +51% Fidelity Sel Utilities +36% Nicholas II +36% Franklin Utilities +34% Sequoia Fund +33% Energy & Utility Shares +33% Vanguarg Qual Div I +32% Profits for the various Dreyfus funds over the same period are: Dreyfus Leverage Fund +18% Dreyfus A Bonds Plus +15% Dreyfus Third Century +15% Dreyfus Fund +11% Dreyfus Special Income +11% Dreyfus Growth Opportunity (-4%) Profits for Dreyfus funds over the 5-year period 3/31/80 - 3/31/85: Dreyfus Leverage Fund +127% Dreyfus Fund +122% Dreyfus Special Income +103% Dreyfus Third Century + 87% Dreyfus A Bonds Plus + 80% Dreyfus Growth Opportunity + 77% This issue of Barron's rates just about every mutual fund in existence over these time periods. If anybody else out there wants the dope on some other mutual fund, I'm sure I can find it for you. By the way, the best mutual fund over the past 15 years, 10 years, and 5 years has consistently been Fidelity Magellan. In some periods they were beat out by a few other funds, but on the whole they have maintained consistently good performance, whereas some of the others make a big splash one luck year and then disappear from the top 100. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Kirby ( ...!ihnp4!akgub!cylixd!dave) (The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of RCA Cylix. They may not even reflect my own.)
johnl@ima.UUCP (09/24/85)
The September 16 issue of Forbes has their annual mutual fund ratings. Rather than report one-year performance, which tells you more about luck than about skill, they have a complicated rating formula which figures out the performance of each fund in periods where the market was generally up and periods when it was generally down, and tries to factor out effects of general market motion, and of occasional lucky or unlucky guesses. They have an "honor roll" of 23 funds which have performed consistently well over the past 10 years. I can post it if there is interest, though if you really care you should go look it up in the library. Relative to the original posting, none of the honor roll funds were from Dreyfus. The worst of all was anything managed by Charles Steadman, with whom they publish a rather sad interview. There are also lots of other interviews with such notables as Peter Lynch, manager of the fantastically successful Fidelity Magellan Fund (which is now so big it can't possibly do as well as it used to, though you could do a lot worse.) John Levine, ima!johnl
miller@rochester.UUCP (Brad Miller) (09/27/85)
In article <305@cylixd.UUCP> dave@cylixd.UUCP (Dave Kirby) writes: >By the way, the best mutual fund over the past 15 years, >10 years, and 5 years has consistently been Fidelity Magellan. In some >periods they were beat out by a few other funds, but on the whole they >have maintained consistently good performance, whereas some of the others >make a big splash one luck year and then disappear from the top 100. > >----------------------------------------------------------------- >Dave Kirby ( ...!ihnp4!akgub!cylixd!dave) Oops! The Magellan fund has only been traded publicly a few years. Most worthy of note: they have NOT been around during a real bear market, so the figures quoted above should be taken with a cow-lick of salt. Brad Miller -- miller@rochester.arpa miller!rochester University of Rochester CS Dept. Lab Manager
stern@tilt.FUN (10/04/85)
A few words in defense of Dreyfus: They do not appear in the honor roll of funds because they never have a truly stellar year (in bull markets). By truly stellar I mean making it into the top one or two percent of all funds in existence. They do pretty well, though (speaking for A Bonds, at least). On the other hand, the Dreyfus Liquid Assets MM fund is one of the top five money market funds in the country: they maintain a shorter average maturity during periods of low interest rates, and move toward longer term paper when rates are at "higher" levels. In short, you move up the low rate -> high rate curve with the market, but when rates fall, the fund is locked into longer term paper that keeps it above the rest. Check out the past 18 months of Barron's to verify this.